Christians claim to be moral people. They claim that God acts as their perfect source of morality, and that the punishment of Hell provides the incentive to behave properly.

Yet every day we see the failure of this system. We talked last week about Sarah Palin’s failures. Over the weekend we learned that her behavior was so egregious that she incited a spike in death threats to president-elect Barack Obama:

Shocked pilgrims looked on as decorations and tapestries were toppled during Sunday’s clash.

Dressed in the vestments of the Greek Orthodox and Armenian denominations, rival monks threw punches and anything they could lay their hands on.

The Greeks blamed the Armenians for not recognising their rights inside the holy site, while the Armenians said the Greeks had violated one of their traditional ceremonies.

Didn’t Jesus teach his followers to love their enemies? As a matter of fact he did: “You have heard that it was said, ‘Love your neighbor and hate your enemy.’ But I tell you: Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you.” (Matt 5:43-44)

Where is the love?

Note that in these two examples, it is the leaders who are behaving so immorally. If this is how the leaders behave (with the leaders presumably having the “closest connection” to God/Jesus and their “love”, and the most vivid understanding of the perils of Hell), we can only imagine what the followers are doing. One telling indicator: American prisons are overflowing with Christians.

So why is Sarah Palin inciting a lynch mob, and why are Christian clergy punching each other in the face?

It is because the whole idea of “Christian morality” is a myth. Christians, by and large, are not moral people. What we have seen over and over again throughout history is that Christianity leads to racism, homophobia, hatred and violence. See these posts for more details on the immorality of Christians:

Johnson,
Many of the moral creeds of Christianity can be found in Humanism and the like – including the moral creeds found on this website. I have no reason to think that Humanists and those who agree with this website don’t also fight, cheat, hate and lie from time to time. Does that mean it’s all a myth too?

on 10 Nov 2008 at 3:02 pm 3.SteveK said …

“Yet, I never hear a solution to the Euthyphro Dilemma that does not end in one horror or another.”

It’s a grounding issue. Moral creeds are either

a)grounded in a reality that could not have been otherwise, meaning they are fixed – or

b) they are ungrounded and are free to be otherwise, meaning they can be shaped and changed.

So, you either have moral absolutism (a) or you have moral relativism (b). Those are the only two options.

God may very well be a moral relativist. I don’t believe that, but it’s entirely possible. What is horrible to you is not horrible to him and that’s the way reality works so we all deal with it.

On the other hand, what is horrible or good is grounded in the fixed character of God who is the grounding of all reality. They cannot be anything but horrible or good and our opinion doesn’t change that. That too is the way reality works and we all deal with it.

on 10 Nov 2008 at 4:15 pm 4.3D said …

I have a question…

If the Secret Service is (accurately IMO) blaming Sarah Palin for inciting violence against an elected official, WHY AREN’T THEY BRINGING CHARGES AGAINST HER?

What’s the normal procedure in such a case?

on 10 Nov 2008 at 7:40 pm 5.Red O'Brien said …

There is no myth about Humanist morality, but there is a myth about atheist immorality.

Does this make sense with respect to ‘logical command theory’ using noncontradiction as an example (A is not -A), and does the conclusion follow at the end?

———————-
The Johnson Dilemma
(1) If logical command theory is true then either (i) noncontradictory truths are the result of X because they are noncontradictory, or (ii) noncontradictory truths are noncontradictory because they are the result of X.

(2) If (i) noncontradictory truths are the result of X because they are noncontradictory, then they are noncontradictory independent of X.

(3) It is not the case that noncontradictory truths are noncontradictory independent of X.
Therefore:

(4) It is not the case that (i) noncontradictory truths are the result of X because they are noncontradictory.

…you get the idea…..

(7) It is not the case that (ii) noncontradictory truths are noncontradictory because they are the result of X.
Therefore:

(8) Logical command theory is false.

on 11 Nov 2008 at 9:23 pm 7.SteveK said …

So logical command theory is false, or is there something wrong with the setup?

on 13 Nov 2008 at 5:44 am 8.nugget said …

“So logical command theory is false, or is there something wrong with the setup?”